Not A Cult: Warmists Katherine Hayhoe Called A “Climate Prophet”

By William Teach January 12, 2019 – 10:30 am

Remember, though, this is totally serious science, you guys

Climate Change Prophet
On the podcast: A scientist who is also an evangelical Christian wants conservatives to understand the dangers of climate change.

Climate change is one of the most politically divisive issues in the United States today: Most liberals embrace the scientific view that it’s a largely man-made phenomenon threatening our very existence, whereas many conservatives see it as fake news.

Standing at the intersection between these two groups is Katharine Hayhoe, an evangelical Christian who is also an atmospheric scientist. Hayhoe, who runs the Climate Science Center at Texas Tech University, has devoted herself to persuading skeptics that climate change is real—including people in her own community.

Hayhoe is featured in the Winter 2019 edition of Foreign Policy magazine as one of 100 Global Thinkers. She is also the guest on our podcast this week.

Let’s be clear on one thing: climate change is real. But, there is no actual scientific proof using the scientific method nor real facts and data that Mankind is mostly/solely responsible for the current warm period. And the way in which the Believers present it makes it look like a cult.

Read: Not A Cult: Warmists Katherine Hayhoe Called A “Climate Prophet” »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 67 Comments | Trackback URL

Individual Responses Are Immaterial In Fight Against ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 12, 2019 – 7:19 am

Quite often, when you get in a discussion with a Warmist, they’ll blow off the question asking them what they are doing in their own lives, saying that we all need to do something, by which they mean government has to force everyone to comply. Things like this

Focusing on how individuals can stop climate change is very convenient for corporations
Sure, it’s morally good to reduce your footprint–but don’t let that deflect attention from who is really to blame.

What can be done to limit global warming to 1.5°C? A quick internet search offers a deluge of advice on how individuals can change their behavior. Take public transport instead of the car or, for longer journeys, the train rather than fly. Eat less meat and more vegetables, pulses and grains, and don’t forget to turn off the light when leaving a room or the water when shampooing. The implication here is that the impetus for addressing climate change is on individual consumers.

But can and should it really be the responsibility of individuals to limit global warming? On the face of it, we all contribute to global warming through the cumulative impact of our actions.

By changing consumption patterns on a large scale we might be able to influence companies to change their production patterns to more sustainable methods. Some experts have argued that everyone (or at least those who can afford it) has a responsibility to limit global warming, even if each individual action is insufficient in itself to make a difference.

I like the part about “those who can afford it.”

Yet there are at least two reasons why making it the duty of individuals to limit global warming is wrong.

INDIVIDUALS ARE STATISTICALLY BLAMELESS

Climate change is a planetary-scale threat and, as such, requires planetary-scale reforms that can only be implemented by the world’s governments. Individuals can at most be responsible for their own behavior, but governments have the power to implement legislation that compels industries and individuals to act sustainably.

Although the power of consumers is strong, it pales in comparison to that of international corporations, and only governments have the power to keep these interests in check.

(Lots more to this you should read)

GOVERNMENTS AND INDUSTRIES SHOULD LEAD

Rather than rely on appeals to individual virtue, what can be done to hold governments and industries accountable?

Governments have the power to enact legislation that could regulate industries to remain within sustainable emission limits and adhere to environmental protection standards. Companies should be compelled to purchase emissions rights–the profits from which can be used to aid climate-vulnerable communities.

(and lots more of this you need to read)

So, it is the companies which provide products and services people want and use who are at blame, not the people want those products and services. And only Government can stop this by force of legislation.

Funny how it always comes down to government force.

Read: Individual Responses Are Immaterial In Fight Against ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Open Borders Dems Consider Suing Trump If He Declares National Emergency On Border

By William Teach January 12, 2019 – 7:07 am

We keep being told that Democrats are not in favor of open borders, but they keep offering policies like using drones and cameras so we can watch illegals cross the border rather than a barrier to stop them, and threatening stuff like this

Dems eye lawsuit if Trump declares border emergency

Democrats are eyeing a lawsuit challenging President Trump if he attempts to circumvent Congress and declare a national emergency to build a border wall.

The legal strategy remains in the theoretical stages, since Trump has so far declined to take such a step — and it’s unclear if he ever will.

But on day 21 of the partial government shutdown — a closure prompted by an impasse over border wall funding — Democrats are prepping for the possibility that Trump will try to sidestep Congress and divert other funds to new wall construction by proclaiming the situation a formal emergency.

Increasingly, Democratic critics of that maneuver view a lawsuit as their best recourse.

“Let’s fight it out in court,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a former law professor who represents a suburban district around Washington.

“Let’s get the president’s obsession out of the legislative context, let’s put it into the courts, let’s reopen the government, and we’ll see if he has those powers or not,” Raskin added.

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who also represents a Washington suburb that’s been disproportionately affected by the shutdown, said it’s “a safe bet” that any emergency proclamation from the White House on the wall would go to the courts.

“I think it is a face-saving — a rather desperate face-saving — measure by the president that has very little intellectual underpinning to justify it,” Connolly said.

Well, this might be interesting from a legal standpoint, as Congress pass the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which President Bush signed, which calls for 700 miles of double layer fencing to be built, for which there is not much more than 5% built. Congress refused to fund it when Democrats took over the House, and failed to do anything since. Certainly Barack Obama had little interest in building it.

That double layer wall could be more than Trump is asking for, and a federal suit by Democrats could have a judge saying “Congress passed the law, why are you not funding it?”

And maybe it would stop most of

Those kinds of things go on and on and on. This is what Democrats want to keep allowing.

Read: Open Borders Dems Consider Suing Trump If He Declares National Emergency On Border »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NC Small Business Blames Govt Shutdown For Failure To Get Loan

By William Teach January 11, 2019 – 3:07 pm

This story unintentionally makes the points that the federal government is way too big, is too involved with our lives, and has assumed way too many roles

From the link, which is a reprint from a sister site out of Charlotte

The government shutdown entered its 21st day on Friday, and local small businesses are starting to feel the impacts.

“What they are doing is stalling my business. One of the most important things in my life is to run this business,” said Brooks Troxler, the President and Owner of Trox Tech Inc.

Troxler owns the tech company that is currently based in Matthews and he employs seven people. (snip)

Troxler was set to start 2019 with moving into a brand new, larger, street front business in Charlotte. However, he needs a loan from the Small Business Administration to make that happen. The SBA is a federal agency that provides loans at low interest rates for small businesses.

“This is something a small business desperately needs. Not a lot of places give out loans to small businesses because they are uncertain,” said Troxler. “There are not many more options out there to get this type of loan.”

There are these things called “banks.” They provide loans. But, if we’re reading into this, it appears as if the business itself is shaky, so banks might not loan the money. So, the taxpayers are supposed to back a shaky loan? Of course, since the reporter failed to do the job and ask a simple question “why didn’t you go to a bank?” we are left to speculate.

But, then, the purpose here is to try and softly throw blame towards Trump as well as saying how super awesome government is and how we totally need them.

The hope was to be in the new property and the ability to hire four additional employees immediately.

“When we stop growing, we stop adding more employees. Right now, I cannot hire anymore employees because I do not have the space to do it,” said Troxler.

How about going and renting a property? Troxler is looking for a $550,000 loan from the SBA. Certainly, the bank would loan less to move into an existing building, right?

Read: NC Small Business Blames Govt Shutdown For Failure To Get Loan »

Posted in Government | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 11, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a house collapsing from too much carbon pollution bad weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Pacific Pundit, with a post on a news station doctoring what Trump looks like during speech.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Washington Post Is Suddenly Enthused To Roll Back Presidential Powers Given By Congress

By William Teach January 11, 2019 – 10:32 am

The Washington Post Editorial Board is on a roll. They’re really upset that Trump most likely has the power to declare a national emergency and build the border wall

Congress gave the president too many powers. Now it must scale them back.

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S assertion that he might sidestep Congress and get funds for a border wall by declaring a national emergency has sent lawyers, legislators and journalists scrambling to figure out whether he actually possesses the legal authority to do so. What they’ve found, in part, is that Congress has delegated a surprising amount of emergency or quasi-emergency power to the executive branch over the years, possibly too much. The implications for constitutional government are potentially serious. Whatever happens with Mr. Trump and the wall, therefore, this body of law is long overdue for a review, and not by the courts but by the body that created it — Congress.

The Brennan Center for Justice has compiled a list of 123 statutes that enable the president to circumvent ordinary lawmaking processes upon the declaration of a “national emergency,” including the statutes Mr. Trump seems most likely to cite if he goes for a wall-building without new appropriations from Congress: two provisions that allow the Pentagon to reshuffle existing military construction funds and redirect them to previously unauthorized purposes in the event of a national emergency. Some of the other laws on the Brennan list are obvious relics: Did you know that the president can press the Fort McHenry National Monument back into military service in an emergency? Many of the provisions on the Brennan list appear never to have been invoked. Still, the laws have real-world impact: Many economic sanctions, past and present, were declared by the president, citing “national emergencies” under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Mr. Trump’s tariff war on steel imports is being waged under the authority of a trade law known as Section 232 (not on the Brennan list) that allows the imposition of levies when the executive branch decides “national security” requires it. (snip)

To its to-do list, the new Democratic majority in the House should add convening hearings on this area of law, with an eye toward cleaning it up. There’s every reason for the Republican-majority Senate, to the extent it cares more about constitutional balance than partisan interests, to join in. The rise of Mr. Trump has reminded everyone of the potential danger from unchecked power in the executive. That power may be doubly dangerous if the unchecked power has, in effect, been handed to the president by Congress in the past. Perhaps those Congresses could not imagine a truly erratic and irrational figure in the White House. The current Congress has no excuse.

Hey, remember how the WPEB was super concerned over then-president Barack Obama circumventing ordinary lawmaking? Oh, they were cheering things like DACA, Waters Of the U.S., the Clean Power Plan, Paris Climate Agreement, and so much more. Nor did they have any issue with how the Affordable Care Act gave enormous new powers to the Executive Branch, up to the point that HHS invented the Contraception Mandate out of thin air.

Heck, media outlets like the Washington Post were telling Obama to go around Congress to do things that the duly elected Legislative Branch did not want to do.

But, you know, Trump, so, #Resist, even when it is utterly hypocritical.

Read: Washington Post Is Suddenly Enthused To Roll Back Presidential Powers Given By Congress »

Posted in Donald Trump, Journalistic Malpractice | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

After Banning Straws, California Now Looks Towards Paper Receipts

By William Teach January 11, 2019 – 6:52 am

You remember when California went utterly overboard in banning straws, right? It was supposedly for ecological reasons, and, there’s some validity there with plastic pollution, but they made the case of ‘climate change’ even stronger. Now we get

California Democrats made plastic straws hard to get. Are paper receipts next?

We’ve all been there. We go to a grocery store or pharmacy, buy an item and walk away with a receipt as long as the Nile River.

One California lawmaker says enough is enough.

Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, unveiled a plan on Tuesday to take the state off of printed receipts. Under Assembly Bill 161, businesses would have to give customers electronic receipts if they don’t ask for physical copies.

“Most people assume that all these receipts can be recyclable. Guess what? They can’t,” Ting said. “It’s common-sense legislation. We think it’s a minimal cost, and it’s really putting the power back in the consumers by saying, ‘Hey, if you want the paper, yeah, you can ask for it, but why force you to take the paper?’”

Many of the bill’s provisions match those of a new law requiring customers to ask for plastic straws if they want one. Businesses that don’t comply with the law would receive two warnings before being fined $25 for each subsequent violation. The penalties would stop once a business hits $300 in a given year.

And, oh, yes, it is about ‘climate change’

Pamela Williams, acting president of the California Retailers Association, said it’s too soon for the group to take a position on the bill. She wonders how the proposal would affect smaller to medium-sized retailers who can’t afford to invest in software that would offer e-receipts.

And therein lies the issue. Not everyone is set up to do this, and it would cost money. Many people want a paper receipt right there in order to make sure it is correct at that time. You won’t look at the emailed receipt immediately. Certain places, like Best Buy, I always get emailed receipt. No problem there. Supermarket? I want the paper. Sometimes a product gets double scanned (I blame myself) and do not catch it till after I paid. Plus, many places want to see a receipt on the way out, like Walmart and Costco.

Yes, some receipts are ridiculously long. Some give them coupons. Some are just wastes. Do we really need an emailed receipt for minor transactions? Do we need to give our email to freaking everyone, now? One big reason many retailers ask if you want it emailed or paper is to get your email so they can market to you.

What about at restaurants? Don’t you have to see the bill first? What would this cost them and so many other businesses? Doesn’t matter, Phil has an Idea, and, being California, it will probably pass.

Read: After Banning Straws, California Now Looks Towards Paper Receipts »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Jim Acosta, NY Times Take Swing At Border Fence, Strike Out

By William Teach January 11, 2019 – 6:38 am

Here’s Excitable Jim Acosta, one of ABC News’ (whoops) CNN pundits, er, reporters, who parachuted down to the border

As people were quick to tell him, there’s no national emergency there because it is one of the most secure areas on the border. And one of the reasons for that is that there is, get this, fencing along the border. Sarah Sanders even thanked Jim for explaining why walls work, and President Trump gave him the Dear Diary treatment.

Then we have Bret Stephens at the NY Times, their resident “conservative”, who’s about as #NeverTrump uber #Resist as it comes

What Real Border Security Looks Like

ON THE ISRAEL-LEBANON BORDER — Other than the Korean Peninsula’s DMZ, there’s probably no border in the world as fraught with the potential for sudden violence as this one, known locally as the Blue Line. Since President Trump thinks border security is the issue of our time, it’s worth considering how Israel — with tight borders, real threats, and a no-nonsense attitude toward its security needs — does it.

What I saw on Wednesday while traveling along the Blue Line was … a fence. A fence studded with sensors, to be sure, but by no means an imposing one. As the accompanying photos show, here is what a long stretch of the border between two sworn enemies looks like.

Does that look like Trump’s idea of a “big beautiful wall”? Does it even look like the “steel slats” the president now offers as his idea of an aesthetic concession to Democrats? Not quite. Yet for the last 19 years it was all the fencing Israelis thought was necessary to secure its side of the Blue Line.

No, but, it does look like it is electrified, as many sections of fencing are around Israel at certain points, including with Egypt and Gaza. Brett forgot to mention that part.

That started to change in December, after Israel announced that it was conducting an operation to destroy tunnels dug by Hezbollah under the border. The tunnel construction — secretly detected by Israel some four years ago — was intended to infiltrate hundreds of Hezbollah fighters into Israel in the event of war. As an additional precaution, Jerusalem is spending an estimated $600 million to replace about 20 kilometers of the fence with a concrete wall, mainly to provide greater peace of mind to the 162,000 Israelis who live near the Lebanese border.

Whoops! An actual wall. Much like other areas of the Israeli border.

So how does Israel maintain border security? Two ways: close cooperation with neighbors where it’s possible and the use of modern technology and effective deterrence where it’s not.

And that’s his real point, after just saying that the border fencing and walls mostly work except for some stragglers, as well as missiles (not a concern on our southern border) and tunnels. He says lots of monitoring 24/7 stops most of that. Well, Trump never said that we’d have a wall an nothing else.

None of this is to say that physical barriers are invariably pointless or evil. Israel’s fence along the Egyptian border all-but ended the flow of illegal African migrants, though most illegal immigrants in Israel arrive legally by plane and simply overstay their visas. The much-maligned wall (most of which is also a fence) that divides Palestinians from Israelis in Jerusalem and other parts of the West Bank played a major role in ending the terrorism of the Second Intifada.

Yet the Israeli experience also suggests that the best way to protect a border is to rely on the tools of the 21st century, not the 12th. Walls only occasionally provide the most reliable security. They can be dangerous for providing the illusion of security. And there are vastly more effective means than concrete to defend even the most dangerous borders. Why can’t Democrats and Republicans simply agree to build additional smart fencing in places where it’s missing and call it, for political effect, an “Israeli-style barrier”?

He keeps making the point for a large physical barrier before trying to say that the wall he said was working doesn’t work. Put a fence up just like Jim Acosta showed, and have sensors. Which was the plan, to have overwatch.

Read: Jim Acosta, NY Times Take Swing At Border Fence, Strike Out »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Liberal World | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Despicable CNN Employee Files Nails, Dismissed Americans Killed By Illegal Alien

By William Teach January 10, 2019 – 4:44 pm

Ana Navarro used to be a Republican long ago, but started losing it with her ObamaLuv, and now, with her Trump Derangement Syndrome and being a #NeverTrumper, she’s fled into unhinged Liberal World. Why else would CNN pair her up in opposition of an actual Republican?

The Hill notes

CNN’s Ana Navarro filed her nails as a supporter of President Trump spoke about crimes committed by those crossing into the U.S. illegally during an oftentimes heated debate late Wednesday.

Steve Cortes, who served on Trump’s Hispanic Advisory Council, attempted during an appearance on CNN’s “Chris Cuomo Prime Time” to cite reports that call into question the argument that undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes than American citizens before host Chris Cuomo accused him of injecting “fake news” into the conversation.

“It’s fake news for you to inject B.S. and say that it’s equal to the real data,” Cuomo said.

“It’s not B.S.,” Cortes retorted. “Even if I were to grant you that, OK, the point is the illegal alien crime rate should be zero.”

As Cortes was making his argument in one of three boxes on the screen, Navarro could be seen filing her nails.

“You can do your nails,” Cortes said in addressing her. “You know who can’t do their nails are people who have been killed, Ana, by dangerous known illegal aliens who have been allowed to stay in this country because of the leftist policies that people like you promote in so-called sanctuary cities.”

Two points on this. First, her pulling out the nail file was most likely planned. She seemed ready for it. And, obviously, as you can see from her facial expressions, she was ready to be dismissive over the deaths of American citizens.

Second, while we do not want to apply this to all the open borders Left, of which she’s a part of, it does seem emblematic. All the liberals and their pet media were up in arms over a few illegal aliens who died while in custody, but didn’t care at all over the murder of Officer Ronil Singh, Kate Steinle, nor others killed, raped, or harmed in some way by illegal aliens. Many do all they can to protect these criminal illegal aliens. Even if we buy into the talking point that illegals commit fewer crimes per capita than American citizens, the number of crimes by illegals should be zero, because they shouldn’t even be here.

But, the open borders crowd doesn’t care. And Ana exemplifies their exact feelings on the subject of Americans harmed by illegals.

Read: Despicable CNN Employee Files Nails, Dismissed Americans Killed By Illegal Alien »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration, Unhinged Tools | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 10, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a world made super bright from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sonoran Conservative, with a post on the fun fact of the day.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove